http://code.google.com/p/bashttpd/
run with systemd or xinetd 于 2011年11月14日 18:05, J. Roeleveld 写道: > On Sat, November 12, 2011 2:11 pm, YoYo Siska wrote: >> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 07:40:08PM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: >>> During my drive home, something hit my brain: why not have the 'master' >>> server share the distfiles dir via NFS? >>> >>> So, the question now becomes: what's the drawback/benefit of NFS-sharing >>> vs >>> HTTP-sharing? The scenario is back-end LAN at the office, thus, a >>> trusted >>> network by definition. >> >> NFS doesn't like when it looses connection to the server. The only >> problems I had ever with NFS were because I forgot to unmout it before a >> server restart or when I took a computer (laptop) off to another >> network... > > NFS-shares can work, but these need to be umounted before network goes. > If server goes, problems can occur there as well. > But that is true with any server/client filesharing. (CIFS/Samba, for > instance) > >> Otherwise it works well, esp. when mounted ro on the clients, however >> for distfiles it might make sense to allow the clients download and save >> tarballs that are not there yet ;), though I never used it with many >> computer emerging/downloading same same stuff, so can't say if locking >> etc works correctly... > > Locking works correctly, have had 5 machines share the same NFS-shared > distfiles and all downloading the source-files. > >> And with NFS the clients won't duplicate the files in their own >> distfiles directories ;) > > Big plus, for me :) > > -- > Joost > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
